5 ms·

Fair enough. If that is the case, both sides win. I took issue with the claim that the UK was just in it for the money, without mentioning that everyone is. How

Fair enough. If that is the case, both sides win. I took issue with the claim that the UK was just in it for the money, without mentioning that everyone is. How could it be any different? This argument has been a common theme I’ve noticed in Brexit debates from people across the EU.

Arnt 6y ago
What makes you think everyone is in it just for the money? The EU started as a peace project, and I think it makes most sense to regard it as fundamentally that, even now. It is an implementation device for peaceful cooperation with your neighbours. It's an endless series of contracts and treaties that provide benefits from good neighbourship. If you accept that view, the EU's view of Northern Ireland in the Brexit negotiations becomes obvious. It's not about solidarity with the member country Eire, it's about keeping the peace (which the Irish also want, yes).
- jpcooper 6y ago
  Money is possibly too narrow a term. I should have said national interests instead. In our current system, however, national interests also seem to strongly correlate with money and thus economic power. Each of the participants in the EU project had national interests in mind.
  - Arnt 6y ago
    I have a feeling that if you try to define what you mean by national interest, you'll get a circular definition. What does France want? To further its national interest. What is its national interest? It is what France wants. Uh. That loop leads to no insight. Perhaps thinking along those lines is frustrating and the frustration makes you blame the current system, but blaming also won't help with insight or understanding.
    - jpcooper 6y ago
      These two concepts are part of a wider network. The measures of those concepts alone closely correlate. It is difficult to think about one without thinking about the other. I am not blaming the system as a whole. It just is. I was more taking issue with (reacting against) and questioning the motives and sources of people's reaction to the system and its big players. I was trying to show that these motives and sources are similar to those of both the big players which they are reacting to (UK), and also those which they leave out (continental EU, Greece). Some motives may be moral, but it should not be forgotten that these motives correlate with the interests of a wider group. For many people alone, being immoral correlates directly with negative personal interest. This is not to forget that people's reactions interact with the wider system bidirectionally.

Arnt 6y ago

What makes you think everyone is in it just for the money? The EU started as a peace project, and I think it makes most sense to regard it as fundamentally that, even now. It is an implementation device for peaceful cooperation with your neighbours. It's an endless series of contracts and treaties that provide benefits from good neighbourship. If you accept that view, the EU's view of Northern Ireland in the Brexit negotiations becomes obvious. It's not about solidarity with the member country Eire, it's about keeping the peace (which the Irish also want, yes).

jpcooper 6y ago
Money is possibly too narrow a term. I should have said national interests instead. In our current system, however, national interests also seem to strongly correlate with money and thus economic power. Each of the participants in the EU project had national interests in mind.
- Arnt 6y ago
  I have a feeling that if you try to define what you mean by national interest, you'll get a circular definition. What does France want? To further its national interest. What is its national interest? It is what France wants. Uh. That loop leads to no insight. Perhaps thinking along those lines is frustrating and the frustration makes you blame the current system, but blaming also won't help with insight or understanding.
  - jpcooper 6y ago
    These two concepts are part of a wider network. The measures of those concepts alone closely correlate. It is difficult to think about one without thinking about the other. I am not blaming the system as a whole. It just is. I was more taking issue with (reacting against) and questioning the motives and sources of people's reaction to the system and its big players. I was trying to show that these motives and sources are similar to those of both the big players which they are reacting to (UK), and also those which they leave out (continental EU, Greece). Some motives may be moral, but it should not be forgotten that these motives correlate with the interests of a wider group. For many people alone, being immoral correlates directly with negative personal interest. This is not to forget that people's reactions interact with the wider system bidirectionally.